All three represent a great package for those looking for something that is capable off-road but also practical in the city.

Having properly road tested and reviewed all these cars in the past, it’s still rather hard to pick a winner. Mainly because all three are great vehicles for different people.

In saying that, about a week ago while Brisbane was mostly underwater, I spent one long and rather hot Saturday test driving all the top selling cars in this segment with a potential buyer.

So then, if you’ve been looking at getting behind the wheel of a compact SUV, keep reading.

All models tested were 4×4 variants with basic off-roading ability.

Engines, Performance & Off-road ability

Subaru Forester (2.5)

Toyota RAV4 (2.4)

Nissan X-Trail (2.5)

Engine Type

MULTI POINT F/INJ

MULTI POINT F/INJ

MULTI POINT F/INJ

Engine Size

2.5L

2.4L

2.5L

Cylinders

Flat 4

INLINE 4

INLINE 4

Max. Torque

229Nm @ 4400rpm

224Nm @ 4000rpm

226Nm @ 4400rpm

Max. Power

126kW @ 6000rpm

125kW @ 6000rpm

125kW @ 6000rpm

Bore & Stroke

99.5x79mm

88.5x96mm

89x100mm

Compression Ratio

9.8

9.6

9.6

Valve Gear

VSOC

VSOC

DOHC

The Subaru Forester has been the best selling compact SUV for some time, you only have to look out on the street to see the popularity of this Japanese-built vehicle. Part of its appeal has been its engine line-up, offering everything from practical motoring, efficient diesel engines and even sporty petrol turbos.

There are three engine choices in the range. At the bottom of the pack is the naturally aspirated 2.5-litre four-cylinder boxer engine (126kW @ 6000rpm – 229Nm @ 4400rpm) which powers the X and XS variants. Diesel lovers will be pleased to know the Subaru 2.0-litre diesel engine is now available in the Forester range and offers 108kW @ 3600rpm and a massive 350Nm @ 1800rpm.

If you want that little more power, the famous 2.5-litre boxer turbo (borrowed from the previous generation Impreza WRX) is also available and delivers 169kW @ 5200rpm and 320Nm @ 2800rpm.

Wait until late February and you’ll also find a new variant called the Forester S-Edition which will make use of the new WRX engine and deliver 24 kW and 27 Nm of torque more than the current XT and hence better performance.

You can see that with the wide variety of engine choices on offer, most buyers are likely to find what they are after. The only downside to the Forester range is the lack of an automatic for the diesel. This may come in the future but for now it’s not on the cards.

The naturally aspirated 2.5-litre is relatively sufficient to meet most buyers’ needs. If you’re happy to drive a manual SUV then you can achieve 0-100km/h times of around 10.4 seconds. Unfortunately for Subaru fans, the Japanese company has continued to use a now dated four-speed automatic in the Forester range which not only hurts the car’s fuel economy but gives a relatively lacklustre 0-100km/h time of 11 seconds.

The 2.0-litre diesel variants are only available with a six-speed manual and do the 0-100km/h dash in 10.4 seconds. The plus side here is the enormous 350 Nm of torque, great for towing (1600kg towing braked capacity).

Of course if performance figures mean anything to you then you’ll find yourself behind the wheel of the Forester XT. Using a five-speed manual transmission, the XT can catapult you from 0-100km/h in just 7.1 seconds, which is rather quick for a car its size. If you must pick the four-speed auto version, you’ll achieve that figure in 7.9 seconds.

From a ride and handling perspective the Subaru Forester has always been the pack leader. Thanks to Subaru’s involvement in motorsports and its STI division, the sporty dynamics of its performance cars are applied in principle to all variants.

Even the base model Forester feels more nimble than the other two competitors and the XT variant makes use of sporty suspension to deliver a well balanced and dynamic vehicle. If you’re after a sporty compact SUV, it’s very hard to argue against the Forester XT or Forester S-edition.

Basic off-roading ability is built into every Subaru thanks to the company’s all-wheel-drive system. The Forester’s ground clearance of 225 mm (highest in this comparison) means it’s capable of getting around some tough terrain but it’s not ideally suited to anything more than dirt roads and minor inclines.

Toyota’s RAV4 has long been the consistent performer in this segment. It has grown up considerably in the past decade and now comes with either a 2.4-litre four cylinder engine with 125 kW and 225 Nm of torque or a 3.5-litre V6 engine that blasts the competition away with 201 kW and 333 Nm of torque. There is no diesel variant.

The RAV4 V6 gets from a standstill to 100km/h in 7.4 seconds via a five-speed automatic. The four-cylinder variants are very similar in performance to the Forester and also make use of a four-speed automatic (five-speed manual available).

The RAV4 V6 can be a bit of a handful to drive, the big V6 engine punches out a lot of power and can lead to some serious understeer if driven inappropriately. On the contrary, the Forester XT delivers a significantly better vehicle for the enthusiastic driver.

Nonetheless, the four-cylinder version of the popular Toyota is a very comfortable drive and delivers its power and torque much better through the four-speed auto than its equivalent Forester. It easily absorbs the poorly maintained roads of Brisbane and gets up hills without too many complaints.

Steering feel is a little soft but then again if you’re after a practical SUV and have no desire for any spirited driving, this is how you’d want it to feel.

If you intend to take your RAV4 off-road beware that it’s a soft-roader at heart. With a ground clearance of just 195 mm, this Toyota is best suited to the city. The active-4WD system will make sure you won’t get stuck in all that many ditches but it’s not the sort of system you can rely on when the hills start to look a little scary. For that you’ll need a vehicle will low-range gears.

If you can’t find something that works in the Forester or RAV4 range, the X-trail is always a good choice. Despite its rather peculiar looks the X-Trail is by and large the car to pick if semi-serious off-roading means anything to you.

Just like the RAV4 and Forester, the X-Trail range starts with a 2.5-litre four-cylinder petrol engine. In Nissan’s case, it delivers 125kW @ 6000rpm and 226Nm @ 4400rpm. Unlike the other two, Nissan offers the X-Trail with a continuously variable transmission (CVT) which, although to most people is simply just an automatic with a different name, is a significant improvement over the four-speed automatic transmissions available in the other two.

The diesel X-Trail is also a worthy competitor with the 2.0-litre engine managing an impressive 127 kW and 360 Nm of torque (for manual), making it more powerful than the Forester. Better yet, it’s also available with a six-speed automatic, however power drops down to 110 kW and torque comes in at 320 Nm (lower than manual to preserve the automatic gearbox).

Driving wise the X-Trail is a genuinely easy car to get around in. The diesel engine is a tad noisy at times but you can get used to it rather quickly. Around town it’s a simple piece of machinery to operate and around twisty roads it does tend to behave itself most of the time. It falls short of the Forester’s impressive handling dynamics.

Even-though the X-Trail has a 212 mm ground clearance, Nissan’s four-wheel drive system is by far the best in its class. If you can physically fit the X-Trail over tough terrain, it will more than likely climb it without too many hassles.

Overall, all three cars offer similar packages when it comes to engine and performance. The Forester stays out on top for ride and handling, the RAV4 tops the three for comfort, and the X-Trail’s powerful diesel, plus the option for an automatic diesel, makes its a unique catch.

Fuel consumption and emissions

Subaru Forester 2.5

Toyota RAV4 (2.4)

Nissan X-Trail (2.5)

Fuel Type

ULP

ULP

ULP

Fuel Tank Capacity

60L

60L

65L

Fuel Consumption

9.3 L / 100km

9.1 L / 100km

9.1L / 100km

CO2 Emission

200 grams/km

213grams/km

228 grams/km

The most fuel efficient car in this comparison is the Subaru Forester diesel manual which uses just 6.4 litres per 100km. The Nissan X-Trail diesel manual is second best with 7.2L/100km (7.4 for auto). Of course the diesels attract a premium price and do their best mileage on the highway.

The petrol variants are equal best with the X-Trail and RAV4 both coming in at 9.1L/100km (manual). The Forester 2.5-litre manual is 9.3L/100km. Interestingly enough, the X-Trail CVT uses exactly the same amount of fuel as its manual brother. Meanwhile the RAV4 and Forester four-speed autos both result in 9.6 L/100km.

The sporty Forester XT uses 10.5L/100km for both manual and auto.

Exterior and dimensions

Subaru Forester 2.5

Toyota RAV4 (2.4-3.5)

Nissan X-Trail (2.5)

Length (mm)

4560

4600-4625

4635

Width (mm)

1795

1815-1855

1790

Height (mm)

1700

1695-1730

1700

Weight (kg)

1475

1550-1655

1525

All three cars are a lot bigger inside than you’d think. The Forester and RAV4 have both certainly done some serious growing in the past few years and the X-Trail provides a very practical package. As far as sheer size goes, the X-Trail measures the longest at 4635 mm, the Forester comes in at 4560 mm and the RAV4 at 4625 mm.

Looks are entirely subjective but it’s hard to argue the X-trail is a better looker than the other two. The Forester is the most masculine in design and the RAV4 is traditional Toyota in that it offends no one yet fails to inspire any feelings whatsoever.

Nissan has well and truly gone for function over form in the X-Trail’s case and that can be assessed from the way the rear is designed for maximum practicality. This is a good thing if you’re also a creature that puts practicality ahead of looks. Not many are.

Overall, all three measure about equal size, on the road the RAV 4 and X-Trail tend to look a little bit bigger than the Forester but the Subaru looks the most sporty and easily exudes more sophistication.

Interior and equipement

The Japanese are not generally known for creating world-class interiors. It’s always been a case of keeping it simple and effective. While the Europeans tend to fill their cars with gadgets and goodies, you’ll be lucky to find something to amuse yourself in any of the three cars here.

Nonetheless, this is partially why Japanese cars tend to be so reliable. Given the simplicity of the technology, little can go wrong. Better yet, if something does happen to go wrong, it won’t require a team of engineers from Munich to work out why.

The Forester’s interior ranges from Spartan plastics in the base model to leather trim with the whole shebang in the XT and premium diesel. Subaru still commands a rather high $4500 to fit a sat nav system in place of the six-stack in-dash CD player. The Japanese company is also yet to catch on to the iPod/iPhone craze, offering only a basic Auxiliary jack and no native support for anything Apple. There is 450L of cargo space if the rear seats are being used or 1660L if the rear seats are folded down.

Given Toyota’s attitude to cars (volume is key), the RAV4’s interior is not all that much different to other Toyota models.

The audio system is not integrated into the dash (which is great if you intend to upgrade it). The V6 ZR6 variant gains a sat nav system but the rest of the range makes do with a reasonable system capable of playing MP3 and connecting to your phone via bluetooth. Cargo space is 540L with the seats up (no official data as to cargo space with seats folded flat).

The Nissan X-Trail also offers a rather utilitarian interior, three simple dials in the middle for airconditioning, a stereo (or sat nav depending on variant) and a storage compartment right in the top of the dashboard. As opposed to the other two, the X-Trail makes use of soft-touch plastics throughout the cabin which makes it far better to touch. Although most will not notice the subtle differences, the X-Trail’s interior has been built with a slightly higher budget in mind. Interior cargo space is 603 L with the seats upright and 1773 L with the seats flat.

All three SUV’s equipment levels are relatively on-par with each other and if you need something fitted that isn’t standard (e.g. Bluetooth in the Forester), there are kits that can make that happen. Best yet, argue with the dealer that it should be standard and get it included as part of the deal.

Safety

Toyota’s base model RAV4 CV doesn’t come with anything more than two front airbags, which is a shame for such a large car in 2011. I’d strongly urge any potential RAV4 customers to upgrade to a Cruiser or higher variants if they value their life in the unlikely event of an accident. The current generation RAV4 has a four-star ANCAP safety rating.

The Subaru Forester is a five-star rated car and like every Subaru in the range, safety is not compromised. All variants come with a full set of front, side and curtain airbags. The X-Trail is the same with even the base model equipped with a full compliment of safety gear and airbags.

Warranty & Servicing

Subaru Forester

Nissan X-Trail

Toyota RAV4

Service Interval

6 months / 10,000 kms

12 months / 15,000 kms

12 months / 15,000 kms

Warranty

36 months / Unlimited kms

36 months / 100,000 kms

36 months / 100,000 kms

Conclusion:

As I said at the beginning of this comparison, all three of these cars offer excellent choices for different people. If you want my advice, the Subaru Forester is the most ideal thanks to its masculine looks, ride and handling, build quality and safety features.

For some the X-Trail’s more practical boot space or the availability of a diesel automatic will be the clincher. Others still may pick the RAV4 simply because it does everything so easily and is a breeze to drive around town.

Count yourself lucky as there are so many choices in the market today. You must go out there and drive at least three different makes and models to make a decision. Even if you still end up buying the car you wanted in the first place, at least you’ll do it without regret. More importantly, remember that all cars reviewed here are AWD (4WD). The X-trail and RAV4 both come in 2WD versions as well, which are good enough for most.

Don’t limit yourself to these three either, there are many other choices out there. Check out the Suzuki Grand Vitara if you want proper off-roading ability, or the Mitsubishi Outlander if you want the best warranty in the business. There are literally 23 choices in the Compact SUV segment, so there is a vehicle there for everyone.

I have no idea why you got so many negative clicks, I couldn’t agree with you more. I have seen all of these and they couldn’t be any more boring on the outside and the inside. I literally nearly fell asleep looking at their pictures in this article.

Dlr1

Thats fine if you prefer those vehicles, but they are significantly smaller on the inside than the three tested here, especially the RAV4 and the X Trail. Given that interior space is a significant reason for buyers in this segment the Sportage/iX35 may be the first ones taken off the list.

Brett

Seriously only the x-trail has off road ability. So if you don’t need that, why would you consider buying the others? They are all mini trucks, heavy and thirsty. Maybe the x-trail and Suzuki comparo would have been a closer match?

Wayno

I do not understand why the x-trail would be better off road than the subaru. The subaru has an AWD system connected to the boxer engine in such a way that theoretically less power should be lost to the wheels through fewer linkages. The subaru alos has more ground clearence and the XS has a low range, albeit a pseudo low range (no real low). I have seen subaru’s with nearly three whells off the ground get out of trouble.

JP

Why is it that the best “so-called” SUV is the one that is always overlooked?

The Suzuki Grand Vitara is as good as the others on-road, but off-road it will slaughter the others with proper low range gearing. I used to own a 2009 V6 Prestige and the thing was remarkable in the outback, especially going up Big Red, and the Simpson Desert, it left the Landcruisers and Patrols looking ordinary because of it’s lighter weight and powerful engine.

I understand that the majority of people will never use it’s ability but why always ignore it?

nickdl

Because these three are the best sellers. Don’t worry though, I’m sure the Grand Vitara pops up a lot in 4WD magazines.

http://caradvice OSU811

I would of disagreed with you a while back
But after driving a V6 Vitara 3.2 prestige for 6 months
I loved it, smooth and powerful V6 with a fantastic
5sp auto and handles well, fuel consumption on the open road is better than the 4cyl vitara, it also has a heap of features for the money, but i did find the 4cyl vitara a little underpowered and the diesel to slow!

Bob

I think you meant:

would of = would have.
Don’t start a sentence with “But”.
Full stop after “loved it”. Also after “handles well”. Also after “Vitara”.
Capital V for Vitara
Finally, “to slow” = “too slow”.

Doesn’t take much effort really! No excuse for appalling grammar.

Sumpguard

Even less excuse for trolling forums kiddo. If you aren’t in an auto forum to discuss cars then sod off.

Denzo

This is a place to talk cars and auto, not grammar, back to school for you then.

I know you sat at the front of the bus.

Max_Castle

Shutup Bob, how are you in any way perfect?
I’ll give you the hot tip… People hate tool-bags like you.

Bob is a tool

Bob, There is no excuse for appalling grammar. Do not start a sentence with No.

Kamran

Good one. If you can’t win an argument, correct their grammer instead.

Jookieapc

* grammar

lol

Gromit

Rather a Kia Sportage or ix35? The quiet achiever here in this mix of 23 cars is the Skoda Octavia Scout.

Jaded

Volkswagen Tiguan? BWM x1?

Jaded

I know they’re not volume players, and are more expensive than the three, but in terms of interior / on road dynamics / engine they are far more advanced than the three here

LN

Both have poor off road capabilities and offer little compared to what the the land rover and the japs manufacturers offer with their medium range SUVs.

But in saying that in this segment, the X-Trail and the V6 Grand Vitera are the 2 big stand outs.

fishman

4 speed auto – Toyota and Subaru should be embarrassed to still be selling this…

t39

Is this a Comparison of Under-achieves in the segment? (not talking sales volumes). Where are the class leaders, Tiguan, Sportage, Scout, even Koleus?

Sinalot

I’m rather surprised at the number of negative clicks on pure mention on some alternatives… nothing wrong with that !!!

nickdl

The comparison is great but an actual verdict would be good. Maybe just a sentence or short paragraph at the bottom saying which car you think is better overall.

Personally I’d avoid the RAV4 altogether because it doesn’t do anything best in the class. The V6 has too much power for the chassis – if you want a decent 6, the Territory would be better. That stereo looks like the one in a 2002 Corolla and the rest of the interior hardly looks better. It’s not as practical as the X-Trail and still uses that four-speed auto.

I’d prefer the X-Trail in most forms although the Forester XT isn’t bad for more money. The X-Trail has the nicest and most practical interior and feels a lot roomier than the others. In addition to that the transmissions are better and it’s far better off road.

Although as said above, I’d prefer a Kia Sportage or a Mazda CX7.

Alborz Fallah

Nick, i did give you a verdict. Read the full conclusion. I’d pick the forester.

nickdl

Sorry, I stand corrected.

Pinky

i just hope that i never ever have to purchase any one of these cars as it would mean my life amounted to nothing. i guess thats a bit rude but my point being they are really boring cars that do not excite any male on the planet!

davie

If you needed to purchase a Forester XT, it would probably mean that you have found yourself with young children (and presumably a wife) you love.

You probably still like fast cars with a bit of “go” but your existing 2 door v8/turbo 4 cant do that and hold all your familys stuff.

you probably enjoy an active lifestyle like riding bikes or surfing or something.

It also means that you have around $40 K spare in your wallet.

So, young family, fast cars, healty lifestyle and spare cash. Not too bad a situation for a Male to be in really.

Pinky

Davie, you have a valid point!
but how many of these soft roaders are actually purchased by people with an active lifestyle.
If you can only purchase a forester or this type of vehicle then you most probably should not have had a family as you most probably can not afford to send them to a good school and heaven forbid if you do send them to a good school and you pull up in one of these next a range of S class mercs and BMW’s.
My point being i don’t really like what these cars stand for!

Dlr1

i can smell a private school badge snob

Denzo

and how many of the X5’s or MERC 4WD’s ever make it to the sand tunes.. wank on please.. and I live on the north shore.. every day up the road I see about 200 hundred of these cars lined up to drop a single (maybe 2) kids off to school.. like you couldnt do that in a normal cal (even a c-class or 3 series)..

And dont tell people what they can and cant do.

Alex

You just read me like a book!

Sold my XR6 Turbo to get married (4 years now), 12 month old and second on the way, own first home, under 30, love my wife, kids and job, wide stays at home, we bought our Forester XT in 2007 new and still have it and love it today. Best car I have ever had (and I have had a few despite my age).

My other car is a 2009 Patrol Auto for the real 4WDing but I have taken my forester down every track I take the patrol.

davie

I know the situation as it describes me as well, except for the spare cash bit…

oh well

Andrew

Not pushing the Patrol too hard then, hey?

davie

The forester really is a difficult decision. it is such a strong package in a lot of ways yet a huge dissapointment in others.

Sadly, If subaru wanted to, it could quickly fix the cost cutting dissapointments by using parts readily available. Kia has shown it can do exactly this, with its quick Dec 2010 upgrades to the recently released sportage.

22-year-old 4-speed auto transmission could easily be replaced by liberty 5-speed auto (available since mid 90’s) or CVT (available since 2009). This current auto is just terrible. It has huge gaps between ratios, is reluctant to kick down, and really makes keeping up with traffic in the city a miserable experience. Customers should not have to pay $3000 extra in 2011 for a “Forester S” with a decent auto.

The dash (dials) look ugly and cheap but the Japanese domestic market has a much nicer looking VW-style white dial dash which should be used.

It wouldn’t take much for subaru to turn the forester into a class leader but clearly they are content to sit on their laurels and allow fast moving compeditors to march straight past them.

Dlr1

The same criticism can be leveled at the Toyota with regard to the auto box, although it is the oldest model in the segment now at 5 years.

And how many journos seem to ignore the lock button for the AWD system on the Toyota dash? Its functionality is essentially the same as the lock position on the X-trail’s dial.

Sam 300TD

What about the Great Wall X240? Yes I’m joking. But for 24k drive away, maybe I’m not. I have never driven one after all.

Toxic_Horse

From what i hear the X240 is ok but the engine is very gutless. maybe the desiel version will be worth a look.

Steven Hambleton

X-Trail is better off-road than the Forester? Bwahahaha!

Forester is a great package only let down by crap front seats and an offset driving position.

We love ours, allows us to carry stuff in the back (sedans are crap for a lot of stuff), allows us to venture offroad to go camping, we’ve even driven on the beach.

We have bikes, a dog, a baby and some camping kit in tow so this class of car is perfect. Prados and Landcruisers are overkill and just cost more to run.

nickdl

Ok so have you driven the X-Trail offroad? By the sound of it you’re quite happy with your Forester’s reasonable ability to travel offroad. I did all of that in my 2000 Liberty wagon. That does not mean that it’s the best offroader in class. You’d be disagreeing with a lot of people in saying that the X-Trail isn’t as good offroad; the diesel engine is better and the interior is far more capable and practical. Don’t forget it has the locking 4×4 system as well.

By no means is your Subaru bad off road, in fact it’s at the better end of the class and I’m glad you’re happy with it. However the X-Trail and Grand Vitara are better off-road.

Wayno

The lock function on the x-trail simply makes it constant 4WD like the forester is all the time. There are also more losses of power to the wheels as the drive train in the x-trail needs more linkages than the subie set up. I believe people think the x-trail is more off road capable coz it looks more utilitarian. I have driven both off road and they are both as capable, or at least I could not tell them apart. If you do not use the lock on the x-trqail in loose sand it can stop you and the lock function on the x-trail only works below 40km/h, though that does not make a hell of a difference.

ElecEng

Alborz, in the first table:
Forester is NOT an Inline4, it’s a Flat4.

Anyway, I would take Forester’s interior, Rav4’s exterior & V6 and X-trail’s drivetrain!!!

http://www.caradvice.com.au/ Alborz Fallah

Correct indeed.
Fixed – thanks

Save It for the track

Forester service intervals are 12,500km/6 months.

http://www.google.com google

Automotive is one of my favorite talks. People often called me Randy ramp. Lol! Anything about cars could be an interesting topic for me. I really love cars, I engrave articles about cars, I collect toy cars and drive my latest Chevy…

nasal explorer

Your point being . . . ?

Dan

“The four-cylinder variants are very similar in performance to the Forester and also make use of a four-cylinder automatic (five-speed manual available).”

four-cylinder automatic? What!! Don’t they mean four-speed automatic?

Jer

Indeed, ‘four-cylinder automatic’ is a horrendously hilarious.

Octavian

Forester – If you care about how good your car looks from the front.

RAV4 – If you want to follow the millions of hypnotised brand followers.

X-Trail – If you don’t care about how good your car looks from any angle.

Comment

Where is the complete review/ road test of the new wrx that was promised 4 months ago. Still waiting…

Terri

These are all yesterday’s cars. Nothing to take us into the future.
Just wait and see the Mazda CX5 to see how old these designs are.

http://profile.yahoo.com/WHH3MNMAV55WITWNZ4EXZXOOYU Joke R

…but the CX5 looks like a recycled ix35! -back, side, and nearly the whole of the front. Seriously.

Brad

Pity its no good off-road.
Its a budged minded Toorak Tractor

Realcars

Hyundai and Kia have far better alternatives especially in diesel.

Four stars and four speed box not good enough Toyota but doubt this will harm repeat business as they are a gulliable lot your customers.

These three are basically 10 year old designs. These vehicles are over priced considering the technology.

Realcars

All three slush boxes especially the subaru would use more petrol than a large family car real world.

Jacob Martyn

It should be illegal to sell 2WD versions of these…”hi, i got a car that looks like a 4WD….to pretend i go off-road”.

http://Audi Robj

New engine and CVT is coming for Forester soon. But really people, learn to drive a manual. esp in this class..

kj

Still waiting for the Skoda Yeti.

Save It for the track

When mentioning Tiguan, X1 and even the three in this comparo, it comes down to some sort of compromise. As an example in terms of luggage space the Tuguan is nowehere near these three. (as one example)
.
regardless of the 4 speed auto, I believe an XT Forester (better in manual) is still the pick for anyone with a pulse.
I note that the incorrect service interval still appears in the article. Maybe one of the Subaru owners can check their owners manual and confirm it. I know people that own Forester’s, Tiguans, Ravs. I’ve also driven a few. To me the XT is the pick. I’m not fussed on the new mod cons stereos, Ipods and the like, if it was me I’d go Forester. I’m quite sure that a Forester drives better than the Koreans, and the constant AWD is superior to any of the part time systems on offer in the others (on road at least).

d’genious

the forester Xt is the car to beat. Rav4 and Xtrail are known to have biased front wheel drive and poor handlers in terrain. The double wishbone suspension on the rear springs of forster gives an agile conering and manouevering. Also the boxer engine cancels vibrations giving the car a smoother ride. In terms of durability, Toyota is worse off followed by the x-trail, aint being biased but on statistics.The xtrail is big enough and wonders alot at speeds above 120km/hr. Symmetrical all wheel drive perfoms better in the snow. I think forester can go long mileage without servicing except the diesel engine, the reporter needs to review that statement. Boxer engines last and thats why the old Porsche still drive upto date

http://www.lynxelectrical.com.au/ Fraser

Owned our Kia Sportage platinum for exactly 1 week today, maybe ours is a lemon but were selling it and taking the loss, from poor build quality, to poor plastics, uncomfortable seats( need to use it a bit before you realise) fuel economy no where near what its claimed no matter how slow you drive, bad noise penetration from engine and exhaust into the cabin, we made a mistake, and like i said its hopefully just our sportage, really at a loss too what too get tho liberty, forrester, mazda cx-5, tiguan, volvo v60 :S too many choices.

http://profile.yahoo.com/WHH3MNMAV55WITWNZ4EXZXOOYU Joke R

You sound like you just hate the Sportage, rather than had any actual experiences with it.

bamboozled

You guys all sound like you really know what you are talking about! Maybe, one of you would be generous enough to offer me some advice… (grammar-natzi exempted). I would love some suggestions of exact vehicles I should consider, models, years and all. I can spend up to about 10K on a used vehicle.

From all the reading I have been doing and knowing what I need in life I reckon i need:

– 5 speed auto with better than average get up and go (i know that usually means manual but i don’t like the amount of concentration and arms i need to dedicate to manual driving, def. want auto)

– A ‘hold’ button so you could drive it like a
manual in extreme conditions, my old car had it and I thought that was really smart and used
it a lot, I live in a very hilly area with unsealed roads, potholes, a
lot of rain etc. but also do a lot of highway driving

– High head height and good leg room (can be small if well designed, don’t like unaturally restricted areas)

– Must be reliable and have good fuel efficiency

– Enough space to sleep in fairly regularly (i like going for one or two night away trips often (but maybe not often enough to dedicate a whole van to it) my partner and i are not tall, 5’6″ and 5’8″
– enough space to move things around regularly (eg i need to go buy 4 wheelie bins for my garden)

– High ground clearance (seems not to be common with van like things)

– At least 3 seats (3rd could be fold up or something)

– At least 3 doors, pref 4 or 5

– I have liked front wheel drive in my old car but open to any arrangement that gives me a basic offroad and good onroad possibilities

– Open to trying new fuel option, always had unleaded but wonder if i should have diesel?

– People often tell me i should get a forrester but i think i need more van-like features, for sleeping and moving stuff around

If this is too much of an ask maybe someone could recommend a way i can sort out how to get what i need, there might be a good select features website or service somewhere?

Any help appreciated, thank you.

MonkeyBoy

My Forester X with mild but still useful low range has managed to do Bald Hill in the Abercrombie National Park. The chances an X-Trail or a RAV could handle this or some of the other difficult spots in the park are zero. Why Subaru doesn’t release a base-model Forester with diesel, 6-speed and a proper low range for country types is simply beyond me. At a 2500 premium such a car would sell out of town like hotcakes.

Abspgr

Wow what a excellent review. Extremally accurate and well written. Thanks this was a huge help. Tell your editor you deserve more money!!!

Trev

Bought a new Rav 4 in 2006, one of the worts driving cars I have ever owned due to the serious throttle hesitation, Whilst Toyota admitted to the design fault they could not do any thing to fix it. My 5th Toyota but it will also be the my last. It such pitty that journalist reviewing vehicles seem to miss these annoying faults.